From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] apt: add apt selftest to test signed package feeds From: "Richard Purdie" Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2022 12:40:25 +0100 In-Reply-To: <9c8771c5-1b2a-0d6f-0658-ba08dd9ad5fa@gmail.com> References: <20220403195046.7060-1-fntoth@gmail.com> <20220403195046.7060-5-fntoth@gmail.com> <694f4b0519a5365015c7eb561767b27f3a07e975.camel@linuxfoundation.org> <369e2108-34a9-dbfc-eb09-817a1eee4604@gmail.com> <9c8771c5-1b2a-0d6f-0658-ba08dd9ad5fa@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit List-id: To: Ferry Toth , openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Cc: Xavier Berger , Alexander Kanavin , Ferry Toth On Tue, 2022-04-05 at 17:23 +0200, Ferry Toth wrote: > Op 04-04-2022 om 22:39 schreef Richard Purdie: >  On Mon, 2022-04-04 at 19:35 +0200, Ferry Toth wrote: > >  Op 04-04-2022 om 15:58 schreef Richard Purdie: > > > > > > > On Sun, 2022-04-03 at 21:50 +0200, Ferry Toth wrote: > > > > Looking at the patches I wondered if this would break testimage and > > > > unfortunately it does: > > > > > > > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/50/builds/5013/s > > > > teps/12/logs/stdio > > > > https://autobuilder.yoctoproject.org/typhoon/#/builders/76/builds/4975 > > > That is weird, do I understand correctly that it fails on: > > >   apt-get remove --yes run-postinsts-dev > > > Reading package lists... > > > Building dependency tree... > > > E: Unable to locate package run-postinsts-dev > > > > > > That is actually *) one line I didn't touch. I did note while testing > > > that I saw this exact message, however that was not counted as a fail. > > > > > > What could cause this? Because the complaint is it can't remove the > > > package because it was not installed. > > > > > > It would be trivial to remove the line > > > > > > *) self.pkg('remove --yes run-postinsts-dev') > > > > > > but how could it have passed the test before? > > > > I think the issue is you edited testimage which is a different set of tests > > which aren't just called by oe-selftest but by things like  > That would be my first thought too, but... > because the failure seems to be on the line self.pkg('remove --yes run- > postinsts-dev'),  that would mean the line self.pkg('update') passed. > And that should only pass if it finds a signed repository and has the key > installed (and believe me, I saw a log of that in the last week). > So, there may be a second thing wrong? I was easily able to reproduce this locally and it shows the setup_source_config_for_package_install() step fails and hence the sources aren't setup correctly, hence the update probably works. > Do you know where I can find the log files referred to: > <..>tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/core-image-sato/1.0- > r0/temp/log.do_testimage.35553 > <..>tmp/work/qemux86-poky-linux/core-image-sato-sdk/1.0- > r0/temp/log.do_testimage.35362 We can get them off the autobuilder if needed but someone would have to manually go in and find/share them. The issue does locally reproduce for me with a "bitbake core-image-sato -c testimage" with package_deb set as the backend. > or could we do a 'quick' check by changing >         self.pkg('update') >         self.pkg('remove --yes run-postinsts-dev') >         self.pkg('install --yes run-postinsts-dev') > to >         self.pkg('update') >         self.pkg('install --yes run-postinsts-dev') >         self.pkg('remove --yes run-postinsts-dev') > ? I'm not convinced that would help us... >   > > > > "bitbake core-image-sato -c testimage" > > > > as well. I'd suggest making the changes in testimage conditional on signing > > being configured. > Yes, regardless the above, we need to either make signing always enabled in > all test cases or detect whether signing is used. > Do you have a hint if there is a variable to test in class AptRepoTest if > PACKAGE_FEED_GPG_NAME has been set? > Otherwise I could just duplicate code and create > apt.AptRepoTest.test_apt_install_from_repo_signed. > What would you prefer? > We should be able to test self.tc.td.get('PACKAGE_FEED_GPG_NAME') in the test and handle accordingly? I did merge the base changes into the release since I thought it was fair to get the fixes in before it was built. We just need to get the test sorted now, I think it is close. Cheers, Richard